I am trying to decide the purchase of digital backs for my studo. I have worked as professional level, with film since 1992 , and I have me determined to give the step to digital. But at this time, is impossible to resolve the enigma that product is the most adequate, above all because, the manufacturers instead of reporting misinform with tests and tests saying that each one of them is the best, but none contributes a serious test of its product.

In this sense, I would like you helped me to make some tests, the same ones that are used for the film calibration (real sensitivity, spectral sensitivity, rank, definition etc) that in addition, they will serve to you, to know its benefits and limitations better and, to the time to make better your work.

Test would please me to make on Aptus 65, 75, phase 45 and 30 and ixpress 39, and many othes if somebody like this, for which I need that somebody that has one renders to it, will not take long time to us and I believe that it will be worth the trouble for all.

For your information, Michael is about to released an article comparing the Phase P45 and Aptus 75 in the context of an Iceland field trip.

This will probably not answer all your questions, but I hope that Michael will provide us with detailed information on image quality.

As far as testing myself, I am currently not in a position to carry out such tests.

Generally speaking though, just about everyone who did compare seemingly reaches the conclusion that the A75 is ahead in most areas. I do of course not know what Michael's take will be on this. He rarely provides a clearcut recommendation.

The main reason to buy a p45 instead of an A75 would be IMHO the Phase rebate for existing Phase users. Now, there are of course other considerations like support,... Aptus doesn't seem to have a very good reputation there.

Overall though, I would personnally wait until Photokina before commiting this kind of money in a back. Many things could happen there that are likely to significantly shake the high resolution market.

If you are looking for differences between MF digital systems, the factors you mentioned (real sensitivity, spectral sensitivity, rank, definition etc) are small compared to the differences in hands-on user experience. To see the difference in resolution between a Leaf and a Phase, you'd have to zoom in to 200% and put your nose on the screen... or put a loupe on a 16x20 inkjet print. However, the hardware controls and software UI and workflow are tremendously different -- and, I'd argue, much more important to your day-to-day work. I don't mean to distract you from some interesting tests, but I'd hate to see you buy a system that has marginally better color reproduction only to struggle with a cumbersome workflow. While you do your tests, be sure not to let the sales reps breeze thorough the demo shoot (they know their software and will make it look easy). Be sure to spend time on it yourself and try to imagine the process on an intense shoot - or 4 intense shoots back-to-back. Spend as much time with each system as possible. In the end, all of the current MF digital solutions are pretty amazing. Have fun - and let us know how it goes.

my interest is not single to see what differences it has between the different manufacturers, but, to really verify as are the benefits, to make a complete test (36 shots) has been only 10 minutes and with that a information very valuable is obtained, nonsingle to know as he is the best one, but, to know the back and its limitations.

Also it serves to know depreciation what with the passage of time can have the system, and to be able to correct them.

For example, the print information say to us that the rank is of 12 real stops and 8 stops between the absolute black and the pure white, but if we thought a little in the results we see that that is not absolutely certain and if is it, is it in some circumstancias.

He is not interesting to know to what extent we can obtain detail from the lights and the shades, as the colors react depending on their luminosity? and it is not equally important to be able to measure and to obtain better and continuous results?

And finally, it is also important to be able to have a base to be able to decide as it is the best material than one adapts to our type of photography before buying it.

"Now, there are of course other considerations like support,... Aptus doesn't seem to have a very good reputation there."

Really ? I had a problem on the first shoot with the Aptus 22 with noise and moire . I called Leaf and emailed some test images and they had me send it back . They bent over backwards and offered to overhight another back to me and paid for me to ship my camera back to them . I was without my camera for one day and they sent me a new one as there was a problem .

my interest is not single to see what differences it has between the different manufacturers, but, to really verify as are the benefits, to make a complete test (36 shots) has been only 10 minutes and with that a information very valuable is obtained, nonsingle to know as he is the best one, but, to know the back and its limitations.

Also it serves to know depreciation what with the passage of time can have the system, and to be able to correct them.For example, the print information say to us that the rank is of 12 real stops and 8 stops between the absolute black and the pure white, but if we thought a little in the results we see that that is not absolutely certain and if is it, is it in some circumstancias.

He is not interesting to know to what extent we can obtain detail from the lights and the shades, as the colors react depending on their luminosity? and it is not equally important to be able to measure and to obtain better and continuous results?

And finally, it is also important to be able to have a base to be able to decide as it is the best material than one adapts to our type of photography before buying it.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73118\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Your choice of an MF system is very much depending on your type of work and it's ability to meet your expectations/ needs.

If you are a commercial photographer the the target is to get the best results on print and the choice shou be according to the results and the ease of getting these results from the 1st minute of setting up the shoot to the point ov delivering a printable digital file.

If you shoot people/ fashion you'll be looking at the capture rate, skin tone reproduction and the ease of handling the system in both tethered and portable modes.

If you shoot still life you'll be looking at colour accuracy, shadow detail, highlight handling, artefacts and also sharpness and ease of focusing htrough the software or any other methods.

For architecture you'll be looking at wide angles handling, resolution and portability (i.e battery life, quality of the screen etc.)

For landscape again the needs are different.

If your work is versatile and you do more than one type of shoots then you need a system that answers ALL your needs and is versatile.

Comparing digital systems is different than comparing film: the same digital back will shoot at different iso with different WB settings and can shoot both colour and B&W.

Resolution, dynamic range, iso rating etc, are all tests that are being made by the manufacturers and are provided on the spec sheets, but reading them is not enough and my best advice would be to test the systems side by side in your own environment at your pace using the same subjects and the same camera (if possible).

As far as service and support is concerned, this is down to your choice of dealer and the relationship you develop with this dealer and with the manufacturer.

Upgrades/ rebates are offered by ALL the manufacturers and we will all do our best to keep you as a happy and loyal customer once you have made your first purchase.

I am trying to decide the purchase of digital backs for my studo. I have worked as professional level, with film since 1992 , and I have me determined to give the step to digital. But at this time, is impossible to resolve the enigma that product is the most adequate, above all because, the manufacturers instead of reporting misinform with tests and tests saying that each one of them is the best, but none contributes a serious test of its product.

In this sense, I would like you helped me to make some tests, the same ones that are used for the film calibration (real sensitivity, spectral sensitivity, rank, definition etc) that in addition, they will serve to you, to know its benefits and limitations better and, to the time to make better your work.

Test would please me to make on Aptus 65, 75, phase 45 and 30 and ixpress 39, and many othes if somebody like this, for which I need that somebody that has one renders to it, will not take long time to us and I believe that it will be worth the trouble for all.

I'm sorry, I don't know your name or where you are located. But I do hope that wherever you are, you can find a knowledgable, reliable and trustworthy dealer who will be able to provide you with these models so that you yourself are able to test them in your own environment and with your own shooting style. There is no substitute for that type of hands-on evaluation.

Some photographers do buy just on recommendations of others, and I would say generally that all the medium/large format digital backs on the market today will satisfy most - it's hard to make a really bad choice - but to really get the one most suited for you, testing yourself is highly recommended.

If no worthy dealers are near to you, then you may also wish to contact the manufacturers directly (Leaf, Sinar, Phase One, Hasselblad).

Although I have never yet used digital MF, I would like to make the following remark:

I own a Canon 1Ds and a 1DsII. I regularly shoot fashion shows and ocasionally interiors. On paper the cameras have similar features with the 1DsII a clear winner on resolution and ISO. In practice, the 1Ds wins every time over the 1DsII when shooting people, even in bad light like fashion shows, while the 1DsII is incredibly good for interiors. The two cameras are nowhere interchangeable, the sensor and electronics make all the difference !

My feeling is there is a similar disparity between various MF backs - which would mean that only testing them *on your own subjects* would work: In particular, if you use makeup on people, then I would drag your own makeup artist and model to the shoot.

Although I have never yet used digital MF, I would like to make the following remark:

I own a Canon 1Ds and a 1DsII. I regularly shoot fashion shows and ocasionally interiors. On paper the cameras have similar features with the 1DsII a clear winner on resolution and ISO. In practice, the 1Ds wins every time over the 1DsII when shooting people, even in bad light like fashion shows, while the 1DsII is incredibly good for interiors. The two cameras are nowhere interchangeable, the sensor and electronics make all the difference !

My feeling is there is a similar disparity between various MF backs - which would mean that only testing them *on your own subjects* would work: In particular, if you use makeup on people, then I would drag your own makeup artist and model to the shoot.

I agree 100% with this. What you shoot has a lot to do with how you appreicate the look of a file and what you expect from a camera and workflow.

I also find the 1ds and 1ds2 very different cameras for exactly the same reasons. For people, skin tones fashion in my style the 1ds looks superior to the 1ds2.

Given all of that I now use the Aptus 22 on a Contax for 95% of all of my work.

I also went through the process of deciding which back was for me and picked the Leaf because the file works natively in numerous processors, which allows for different looks and response, the lcd at the time was the best and most importantly the A-22 hooked up to a G4 powerbook runs reliable and very fast.

My complete digital kit including computer, stand, mouse, drives fits in one single pelican case and using Leaf V-8 virtually can run itself, tech free.

I shoot the majority of the time on battery power with a dcb 160 watt battery mounted to the stand.

Batch processing in CS on a G4 powerbook takes 17 seconds a file and since the Aptus produces a small preview tiff and can be read in I-view or Photo Mechanic you can early in the workflow process rename, edit and sort very quickly.

I'm obviously partial to the Leaf, but mostly because I am accustom to it but I have found it takes more than just a test session to learn any of these cameras, dslrs or medium format backs.

If your coming from film keep in mind moving to any new digital camera is like changing film, cameras and labs in one fell swoop.

Once again, since the aptus will process in CS, CS2, Leaf V-8, Leaf LC10, Raw Developer and Lightroom there are options to get different results.

I also have been very impressed with Leaf Serivce and advice from Yair in London and Rick A. at Leaf of America.

Their response time to questions and issues is usually in minutes rather than days or weeks.

The Aptus isn't perfect, nothing is, but for me its the best system for what I do and presently,I find it easier and more reliable than any dslr.

I just purchased and started shooting with a Leaf Aptus 75 and really like the camera. Like mentioned in a previous post, every back has it’s plus and minus. In a perfect world I would shoot with both backs, but I went with the leaf because it had more pluses then the Phaseone.

I would be happy to play with my Aptus 75 and do a test against the P45. I was going to do a test with a friend in NYC who shoots with the p45. The problem was, I did not recive my Aptus 75 in time.

Quote

I am trying to decide the purchase of digital backs for my studo. I have worked as professional level, with film since 1992 , and I have me determined to give the step to digital. But at this time, is impossible to resolve the enigma that product is the most adequate, above all because, the manufacturers instead of reporting misinform with tests and tests saying that each one of them is the best, but none contributes a serious test of its product.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73072\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Quote from: James Russell,Aug 12 2006, 10:57 PM

My complete digital kit including computer, stand, mouse, drives fits in one single pelican case and using Leaf V-8 virtually can run itself, tech free.

James I would be very interested to know more about your laptop platform. I posted on pdn looking for ideas. PDN - Laptop support Its hard to tell from the picture on your site? Is the laptop on the lucite base mounted to a tripod? How thick is the lucite. How does the lucite do with the heat of a laptop?

I am trying to put together my location kit . I would like to put my laptop, digital back and accessories in 1 Pelican 1560 Case The problem is the 17inch laptop takes up a lot of the space. I am thinking of making 2 levels. Level 1 digital back, and accessories. Level 2 would just be the laptop.

Quote

My complete digital kit including computer, stand, mouse, drives fits in one single pelican case and using Leaf V-8 virtually can run itself, tech free.

I'm sorry, I don't know your name or where you are located. But I do hope that wherever you are, you can find a knowledgable, reliable and trustworthy dealer who will be able to provide you with these models so that you yourself are able to test them in your own environment and with your own shooting style. There is no substitute for that type of hands-on evaluation.

Some photographers do buy just on recommendations of others, and I would say generally that all the medium/large format digital backs on the market today will satisfy most - it's hard to make a really bad choice - but to really get the one most suited for you, testing yourself is highly recommended.

If no worthy dealers are near to you, then you may also wish to contact the manufacturers directly (Leaf, Sinar, Phase One, Hasselblad).

Best of luck to you,Steve HendrixPPR Digital[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73157\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I am located in Barcelona, Spain, and I already contacted with the local representatives.

One represents sinarback and leaf simultaneously, and single it offers the possibility to me of proving the system in group (workshop) and of a unit in particular, another one (phase) does not know of what I am speaking to him and does not say that they are the best ones anf offer the possibility to me of proving one (the one that has of sample p25) , hassel to me in principle discarded it not to have range that I need.

In any case, which wanted to evidence in this forum, it is the misinform of the own manufacturers, or but, of the manufacturer, so that it seems that kodak has to do with all, or makes the sensor (phase) or makes the back (leaf) and does not give, through its representatives or publicly in Web, the tests to its material, for that reason it was happened to me to be able to make them between us and thus be able, nonsingle to choose the best one for each situation, but to really know what possibilities and what deficiencies and like correcting them of which some already they have.

I guess, as a photographer what one does is sell a look, and the camera is the tool one uses to create this look with reasonable effort.

As James has noted the cameras and backs all have different characteristics, and what you really need is to know that the "look" and workflow will fit you.

The products (Phase, Leaf, Hasselblad, Sinar) are all reported to work, with good quality and decent reliability, but lack of buyer confidence is what's slowing the market. If the back makers put out more info or held regular unpressured shooting demo sessions, people could go, use the things, and make up their minds easily, and take out their wallets.

To the back makers:Please, Sirs, be more open - your products are so nice they'd sell more if you showed them around more !

I guess, as a photographer what one does is sell a look, and the camera is the tool one uses to create this look with reasonable effort.

As James has noted the cameras and backs all have different characteristics, and what you really need is to know that the "look" and workflow will fit you.

The products (Phase, Leaf, Hasselblad, Sinar) are all reported to work, with good quality and decent reliability, but lack of buyer confidence is what's slowing the market. If the back makers put out more info or held regular unpressured shooting demo sessions, people could go, use the things, and make up their minds easily, and take out their wallets.

To the back makers:Please, Sirs, be more open - your products are so nice they'd sell more if you showed them around more !

I think one of the reasons the DB's require a dealer for demonstration is they are on the outset more complicated, or require a steeper learning curve.

Once you get into the systems they are really easier (at least my experience with the Leaf) but a good dealer like Steve Hendrix knows the difference in products, software, camera platforms which will speed up the learning curve.

Now that Leaf and Phase are offering thier A-65 and P-30's into the $15,000 range and in Leaf's case the iso has increased to 800, they are really getting into dslr territory in price and useability, especially as the Leaf has a useable lcd.

The real test is to use one of these for a period of time. It takes more than a side by side comparison or a quick look at the files.

Once again none of these systems are perfect and are truly specialized devices.

Phase with C-1 is the gold standard but runs slower tethered than an Aptus if you use V-8.

Leaf's LC10 is still in development and has it's issues with large numbers of files, though is getting better and at least Leaf offers an alternative software with V-8.

Personally I think V-8 is the best tethering software I have used. It is very fast, takes low power to run and is rock stable.

With my A-22, just going from V-8, LC10, to pscs in processing makes a noticeable difference in the look.

I am really overwhelmed with the Aptus. Leaf has been the most responsive company I have ever dealt with.

They may be owned by Creo, who is owned by Kodak, but they operate like a small one-on-one company and have never failed a request.

Leaf is very transparent and offers their code to about anyone that wants to write to it, which I also find refreshing.

Still, in the end it is the look of the photograph and I love the files and have shot just about everything I do with the Aptus, usually tethered.

James I would be very interested to know more about your laptop platform. I posted on pdn looking for ideas. PDN - Laptop support Its hard to tell from the picture on your site? Is the laptop on the lucite base mounted to a tripod? How thick is the lucite. How does the lucite do with the heat of a laptop?

I am trying to put together my location kit . I would like to put my laptop, digital back and accessories in 1 Pelican 1560 Case The problem is the 17inch laptop takes up a lot of the space. I am thinking of making 2 levels. Level 1 digital back, and accessories. Level 2 would just be the laptop.[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I guess, as a photographer what one does is sell a look, and the camera is the tool one uses to create this look with reasonable effort.

As James has noted the cameras and backs all have different characteristics, and what you really need is to know that the "look" and workflow will fit you.

The products (Phase, Leaf, Hasselblad, Sinar) are all reported to work, with good quality and decent reliability, but lack of buyer confidence is what's slowing the market. If the back makers put out more info or held regular unpressured shooting demo sessions, people could go, use the things, and make up their minds easily, and take out their wallets.

To the back makers:Please, Sirs, be more open - your products are so nice they'd sell more if you showed them around more !

I agree with you, and I follow without understanding this lack of information.

for example, in webs of leaf, when you want download an sample raw image, in leaf A65 , of the 2 that there is, one is is moved and other badly exposed and displays noise in the shades. In it phase single is possible to see a sample of the 25...

I believe that we deserve ourselves as you say one more a more open information.

I agree with you, and I follow without understanding this lack of information.

for example, in webs of leaf, when you want download an sample raw image, in leaf A65 , of the 2 that there is, one is is moved and other badly exposed and displays noise in the shades. In it phase single is possible to see a sample of the 25...

I believe that we deserve ourselves as you say one more a more open information.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73245\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you are serious about going to a medium format back, any raw or processed sample will not tell you what you need to know.

In fact I don't know why the makers even post raws because shooting in your style or genre will be much different.

Also and I stress this, it takes time to learn these cameras, even the Canons. Going from a 1ds to a 1ds2 is a way different file and look.

Same with comparing a Phase or a leaf.

What is more important is the workflow. For me I regularly shoot 50 to 65 gigs a day so a three day shoot is a lot of files to edit, name, organize and make web galleries and in the case of Leaf there is about 5 ways to do this.

Just sitting down with one 2 hour session shooting 25 files will not give you a fair representation of how the workflow's can be best suited for you.

One of the reasons Leaf has a help line with a real person is to guide you through this. That is also a reason to chose a good dealer that will also offer tech advice.

Phase also has some very good dealers that will stand by you through the process.

Actually since Leaf and the dealers offer so much service the perceived high price of a mfdb is really quite reasonable.

There is a lot of ways to look at a digital camer purchase. In the dslrs it seems most people move up every 18 months or 2 years to a complete new system.

With the mfdb's they really can be 3 to 5 year cameras maybe more.

I should add that I am a big fan of Leaf and have never tested a Leaf, vs. the Phase, vs. the Imacon.

I have shot the A-22 next to the D2x, 1ds and 1ds2 for my own comparisions.

I have found Leaf, especially Yair, is the most responsive company I have dealt with in my career and at unless something drastic changes in our industry, do not know why I woiuld consider switching brands.

My next purchase will be an A-65 to backup the A-22 and for higher iso.

Even if Canon came out with a $10,000 medium format camera tomorrow, I still would go with the Leaf because I can keep eveything using one camera system, oen set of lenses and one workflow.

I can't stress enough how important workflow is.

If I shoot non tethered, I use I-view to rename and edit the files. The Aptus produces a small Tiff and I-view and photo mechanic reads it. Its not large enough for critical judements like focus but it is large enough to do a quite edit, rename and sort.

I then make jpegs for web galleries in two ways.

If the files are dead on and need no adjustment I put the .mos files in lc 10 and it makes excellent 1000 pixel wide jpegs automatically at about 4 seconds a jpeg.

If I need to make many random adjustments I use PSCS and then batch process, jpegs and full rez tiffs at 17 seconds a file on a G-4 powerbook.

For singular processing, or to acheive a different look of the file, I use either V-8, LC10, Raw Developer or PSCS.

If I shoot tehterred, which is most of the time, I use V-8 a 17" powerbook and the A-22 shoots fast at about 1.2 frames a second. I set the look of each file using the controls of V-8 which allow for curve adjustments, WB settings, rgb adjustments and brightness/contrast.

Each folder is named for a specific shot and each file goes in the corresponding folder.

Since the files are already the correct color and look, I let lc10 make automatic jpegs and then I'm done.

If you are serious about going to a medium format back, any raw or processed sample will not tell you what you need to know.

In fact I don't know why the makers even post raws because shooting in your style or genre will be much different.

Also and I stress this, it takes time to learn these cameras, even the Canons. Going from a 1ds to a 1ds2 is a way different file and look.

Same with comparing a Phase or a leaf.

What is more important is the workflow. For me I regularly shoot 50 to 65 gigs a day so a three day shoot is a lot of files to edit, name, organize and make web galleries and in the case of Leaf there is about 5 ways to do this.

Just sitting down with one 2 hour session shooting 25 files will not give you a fair representation of how the workflow's can be best suited for you.

One of the reasons Leaf has a help line with a real person is to guide you through this. That is also a reason to chose a good dealer that will also offer tech advice.

Phase also has some very good dealers that will stand by you through the process.

Actually since Leaf and the dealers offer so much service the perceived high price of a mfdb is really quite reasonable.

There is a lot of ways to look at a digital camer purchase. In the dslrs it seems most people move up every 18 months or 2 years to a complete new system.

With the mfdb's they really can be 3 to 5 year cameras maybe more.

I should add that I am a big fan of Leaf and have never tested a Leaf, vs. the Phase, vs. the Imacon.

I have shot the A-22 next to the D2x, 1ds and 1ds2 for my own comparisions.

I have found Leaf, especially Yair, is the most responsive company I have dealt with in my career and at unless something drastic changes in our industry, do not know why I woiuld consider switching brands.

My next purchase will be an A-65 to backup the A-22 and for higher iso.

Even if Canon came out with a $10,000 medium format camera tomorrow, I still would go with the Leaf because I can keep eveything using one camera system, oen set of lenses and one workflow.

I can't stress enough how important workflow is.

If I shoot non tethered, I use I-view to rename and edit the files. The Aptus produces a small Tiff and I-view and photo mechanic reads it. Its not large enough for critical judements like focus but it is large enough to do a quite edit, rename and sort.

I then make jpegs for web galleries in two ways.

If the files are dead on and need no adjustment I put the .mos files in lc 10 and it makes excellent 1000 pixel wide jpegs automatically at about 4 seconds a jpeg.

If I need to make many random adjustments I use PSCS and then batch process, jpegs and full rez tiffs at 17 seconds a file on a G-4 powerbook.

For singular processing, or to acheive a different look of the file, I use either V-8, LC10, Raw Developer or PSCS.

If I shoot tehterred, which is most of the time, I use V-8 a 17" powerbook and the A-22 shoots fast at about 1.2 frames a second. I set the look of each file using the controls of V-8 which allow for curve adjustments, WB settings, rgb adjustments and brightness/contrast.

Each folder is named for a specific shot and each file goes in the corresponding folder.

Since the files are already the correct color and look, I let lc10 make automatic jpegs and then I'm done.JR[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73251\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You are all the right.

each one has different necessities, in your case the speed of process is essential in mine is not it.

I make a single image per day, sometimes 10 imagenes of different objects or bottoms to obtain one, and in some cases of longer series 25 to the day, in the case of simple products.

I give the reason you in that the decision of each one depends on its own necessities, and in my case they are the extremely exact reproduction of the color and a very exact control also of the contrast, variations by reciprocity and intermitency etc. It is for that reason of my insistence with the technical information.

I thank for very many your words and, in fact, I will send to Steve a mail explaining exactly those necessities of which I send copy to you so that you much more have an exact idea of my work and, if you need my help in any aspect, I am to your whole disposition.

And returning to the initial subject, would not be bad that the information of leaf and phase outside more thecnical and rigorous and replaced (phase) the obsolete sample image and the defocused, moved and with noise of leaf...